We have already devoted many editorials to the terminology used in penetrant testing (PT) and magnetic particle testing (MT).

We always recommend that the authors of standards, specifications, training courses, multiple-choice questionnaires and any other document comply with the terminology, so that everyone can understand each other.

However, even in strict accordance with the terminology standards, there is sometimes some kind of ambiguity.

As a matter of fact, in the ISO 12706:2009 standard, in the same section, the terms "solvent–based developer" and "non-aqueous wet developer" appear with the same definition.

As a result, in the ISO3452-1:2013 standard, sometimes the term "solvent-based developer,” sometimes the term "non-aqueous wet developer” is used. Would it not be better to use only one of these terms, but not both in the same document?

Imagine the candidate who, in order to pass the COFREND (editor’ note: COFREND is the French Confederation for Non-Destructive Testing)certification exam, finds one of the two terms in his training course and the other one, on the exam’s day, in the multiple-choice questionnaires. This may be quite unsettling for the candidate. To avoid this situation, the best way is to use the term "solvent-based developer (non-aqueous wet developer)."

One may agree that it would have been easier if the choice between these two terms had been made in the ISO 12706:2009 standard.

Our American friends do not have this problem, as only the term "non-aqueous wet developer" is written in the ASTM E1316 -14 standard. The term "solvent-based developer"is not mentioned.

In these circumstances, for a world-wide harmonization, would not it be better than the ISO 12706:2009 standard keeps only the term "non-aqueous wet developer"?